Journal of Contemporary Research in Social Sciences

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Contemporary Research

scholarly journals Znaczenie empirii jako podstawy wyjaśniania, prognozowania i praktyki w naukach społecznych

2021 ◽  
pp. 27-49
Author(s):  
Sebastian Kozłowski
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Political Science ◽  
Social Reality ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Scientific Paradigm ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Contemporary Research ◽  
Scientific Dispute ◽  
The Subject

The considerations presented in the article are to be an impulse to reflect on the foundations on which modern scientific discoveries are based. The aim of the analysis is to present a number of doubts as to the accuracy and perfection of contemporary research results in social sciences, in particular in the discipline of political science. In social reality there are still many limitations both on the part of the human being as the subject examining reality and the imperfections of the tools he uses. The article discusses attitudes towards scientific dispute consisting in the clash of the scientific paradigm based on empiricism and positivism with postmodern interpretivism within the hermeneutic paradigm will soon end.

Bias

2021 ◽  
pp. 22-25
Author(s):  
Aysel Küçüksu ◽  
Stephanie Anne Shelton
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Gender Bias ◽  
Ethical Issue ◽  
Confirmation Bias ◽  
Contemporary Research ◽  
Research Bias ◽  
The Social ◽  
Conducting Research

This chapter looks at bias, a term which refers to an uninvited, but inevitable aspect of conducting research. It is usually equated with subjectivity, the distortion and manipulation of data, or a lack of objectivity, which undermines the credibility of the research. Bias comes in many forms and the chapter discusses the two that are the most common in the literature: gender bias and confirmation bias. The long-standing positivist interpretation of bias considers that it is an inherently problematic ‘ethical issue’. Yet, contemporary research has called for a ‘reconceptualization’ of this perception of bias in order to encourage a more nuanced view. In the social sciences, bias is a manifestation of how cultural and political standing affects our approach to science. Bias should be acknowledged early on to ensure that both researchers and readers have the critical tools necessary to recognize it and evaluate its influences. This approach originated in anthropology and is known as ‘positionality’.

Sharing data: Some examples

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-276
Author(s):  
Robert M Hauser
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
Data Sharing ◽  
Panel Study ◽  
Scientific Data ◽  
History Of Astronomy ◽  
Contemporary Research ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of ◽  
Social Scientific

Shared methods, procedures, documentation, and data are essential features of science. This observation is illustrated by autobiographical examples and, far more important, by the history of astronomy, geography, meteorology, and the social sciences. Unfortunately, though sometimes for understandable reasons, data sharing has been less common in psychological and medical research. The China Family Panel Study is an exemplar of contemporary research that has been designed from the outset to create a well-documented body of shared social-scientific data.

Which ‘being’ in wellbeing? Ontology, wellness and the geographies of happiness

2017 ◽  
Vol 42 (6) ◽  
pp. 807-829 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas S.J. Smith ◽  
Louise Reid
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Geographical Research ◽  
Contemporary Research ◽  
The Social ◽  
Human Inquiry

This article examines current approaches to wellbeing research in the social sciences, reviewing their underlying ontologies to explore which ‘being’ is implied in contemporary research on wellbeing. It critically analyses themes from the ‘science of happiness’ for their focus on a decontextualized and individualized subject and highlights the emergence of an alternative, developing geographical research agenda in the study of wellbeing, termed here ‘intra-active wellbeing’. It is argued that this research agenda draws together formerly disparate aspects of geographical thought – classically humanistic wellbeing research and more-than-human inquiry – and creates space for a more pluralistic field of wellbeing scholarship.

scholarly journals The silenced voices of architectural discourse: promoting inclusion through qualitative research

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
John H. Trefry ◽  
Laurel B. Watson
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Built Environment ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Architectural Discourse ◽  
Contemporary Research ◽  
The Social

Contemporary architectural discourse is primarily framed by institutional hegemony. Scholarly works written in a voice derived from this privilege inherently exclude the voices of those untrained individuals who inhabit the built environment. The field of architecture, most notably in the AIA’s policies and positions, calls for more diverse viewpoints and a more complex understanding of the public’s relationship with architecture. It is not possible to make this complexity apparent through the monolithic viewpoints of institutional scholarship. This essay explores a variety of more inclusive research methods established in the social sciences under the banner of qualitative research. We focus on how qualitative research satisfies contemporary research expectations more effectively than positivist institutional scholarship and how qualitative research has a specific congruency with the field of architecture.

What Can We Learn From Factorial Surveys About Human Behavior?

Methodology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Knut Petzold ◽  
Tobias Wolbring
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Behavioral Intentions ◽  
Actual Behavior ◽  
Full Time ◽  
Factorial Survey ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
Intended Behavior ◽  
The Social ◽  
Survey Experiments ◽  
High Level

Abstract. Factorial survey experiments are increasingly used in the social sciences to investigate behavioral intentions. The measurement of self-reported behavioral intentions with factorial survey experiments frequently assumes that the determinants of intended behavior affect actual behavior in a similar way. We critically investigate this fundamental assumption using the misdirected email technique. Student participants of a survey were randomly assigned to a field experiment or a survey experiment. The email informs the recipient about the reception of a scholarship with varying stakes (full-time vs. book) and recipient’s names (German vs. Arabic). In the survey experiment, respondents saw an image of the same email. This validation design ensured a high level of correspondence between units, settings, and treatments across both studies. Results reveal that while the frequencies of self-reported intentions and actual behavior deviate, treatments show similar relative effects. Hence, although further research on this topic is needed, this study suggests that determinants of behavior might be inferred from behavioral intentions measured with survey experiments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document